Yeah, I'd have to say Smith is the #1 Super Middleweight at the moment, he beat the #1 himself. It's an open division at the top though, I just hope Smith will be in a unification fight versus one of the American based champions relatively soon.

I assume you heard about HBO pulling out of boxing? If Golovkin signs to ESPN it would be interesting to see if K2/360 Promotions put the Super Fly series on ESPN as well. Watching Ancajas versus overmatched guys is not really interesting to me anymore. I'd love to see him versus one of the other legitimate top Super Flyweights.

I just want to see competitive matchups however they happen. There are a lot of options out there, the plan was Rungvisai vs. Estrada II for SuperFly 4, if Yafai vs. Ancajas could happen that would be good too, don't know about the relationship between Matchroom and Top Rank though, Indongo was a Matchroom fighter so maybe it's possible.

Doesn't seem like he wants to. It doesn't seem like the third fight is being talked about a lot in the immediate future, but that may be because Canelo and Golovkin's network situation isn't figured out. To me, Murata seems tailor-made for Golovkin and Murata does huge numbers in Japan. It would be a big fight at the Tokyo Dome.

I think the commentary and production are pretty bad on ESPN, but that may improve if they get more signings. Hopefully Kellerman and Roy Jones go to another network, Kellerman works on ESPN so maybe that's a good possibility. Showtime is the only network I think has good production at the moment, I don't like Mauro and Paulie on commentary but I just ignore them honestly.

Me too. I think there is enough to gain from it, financially and otherwise, Matchroom and Top Rank can work together, I would think.

Meh, what can Golovkin acconplish that he hasn't already? If now isn't the time to retire, when is?, Murata doesn't have any legitimate titles, so I think Golovkin should retire, but we'll see.

I am different, I don't like Kellerman, and am a fan of the Showtime team, but one thing I will say, is that Paulie was biased about Golovkin vs Alvarez II, and not consciously, I think he failed to separate who he wanted to win from the fight, because I can easily understand how you can find 7 rounds to give Alvarez.

Yeah, people are going get tired of them facing lower level opposition and it'll eventually be time to take a risk and have them competitively matched.

I agree but Golovkin seems to think otherwise. Murata, in my opinion, is a low risk and high reward opponent while still being a credible opponent. I assume if he fights Murata he's going to try to get a fight with one of the other champions, but that's to be seen.

I'm not a huge Kellerman fan either but he's an improvement over what ESPN has. Roy Jones is an improvement over Tim Bradley. Paulie was on the Sky commentary I assume? How was he biased for Golovkin, I didn't watch the Sky broadcast. That's part of my problem with Paulie that's also a problem with Kellerman. They make their minds up about something and keep going and going even if it's wrong.

I don't know, I'm pretty suspect of anyone at the Ingle gym so it didn't surprise me that something like this came up. Conte knows a lot obviously but he also has conflicts of interest. Saunders came up with an excuse so I think he'll end up being able to fight Andrade, and often things like that come down to if the right palms can be greased at the commission. Do I think he should be suspended and/or stripped? I don't really know the details of how much it was, does the amount correspond to what his excuse is? I hope they don't strip him because I want to see a competitive fight, no one wants to see Andrade vs. the bum mandatory they'll bring in.

I hope he loses the title, is fined, but we still see the fight, like when a fighter misses weight. Just for the record though, there is no bum in this scenario, 17-0, 16KOs, good opposition? No idea, good enough for a WBO no. 2 ranking, anyway.

It is bullshit that this happening in boxing, it has to be sorted out, I don't believe for a second that Saunders is clean, Conte suspected him before the Monroe fight, definitely no surprise in terms of his character, he is well known for being a nasty bully, so the evidence really is stacking up against him.

If it does happen it'll be with Saunders as the champion and Andrade as the challenger. I think the guy is a can, he's only fought on an African level and hasn't beat a single top 50 Middleweight in the world, let alone top 25 or top 10. Sanctioning body rankings don't really mean a lot to me, they are political, not based on who is actually the best. If you don't believe me poke around at some of them, they are crazy.

I don't believe it either, but I also think doping is a lot more prevalent than you do, and I don't have a big issue with it as long as people can pass the most stringent testing out there. Obviously, there aren't people roiding out to a crazy obvious extent like in the early wild west days of MMA in boxing. Conte was working with Monroe so he's biased, but pretty much everyone at the Ingle gym is suspect in my book. Remember that Galahad was banned for two years by UKAD.

Actually, ranking wise, I 100% agree, but I highly doubt the guy is a can, I think you underestimate the significance of an unbeaten record, confident fighter, out to prove something, but ultimately, that discussion is a stalemate is it not? Because there is no evidence either way, no plausible reason to think an unbeaten, dominant, young, but untested fighter is good or not good.

Well, we are outside, on the inside, they are all saying the same thing I am, and nit uust fighters, trainers, promoters. Teper is a hardcore drug cheat piece of shit, but in general, fighters do what they can get away with, but know they will get caught if they push it. I do remember that, I've never been a fan of the Ingles.

Saunders failing the test has taken some positivity away from the fight.

The one thing I will say is that the default position to a claim should be that it isn't true if there isn't good proof to show otherwise. If it were true that unbeaten unknown fighters were often good competitors to top 10 world level fighters, we'd see a lot more upsets, but those kinds of fighters are often cans to crush like Kiram was for Matthysse.

Not sure what you mean by that regarding what you and the fighters, trainers, promoters are saying.

Maybe, but in the end if the fight still happens most people will still want to see it as much as before. If Saunders gets pulled that's really bad for the card even if Andrade will almost certainly beat the mandatory.

So what you are saying is, when in doubt, assume they are not good rather than assume they are good, so to you, not good until proven good, never the other way around, ok, bit too stubborn and over critical in my opinion, but ok, as long as you give them their due crdit when they prove you wrong, like Callum Smith. Kiram was not a can to crush, which is why it was so close for 7 rounds, the levels aspect is important, but Matthysse is not much better than Kiram, past prime, all that, but Kiram is not a can, 38-0, have to respect that, at least to some degree, with all those title wins, but to be fair, Kiram is not good at world level, I haven't said he is since Pacquiao beat Matthysse, I never flat out said he was was class, I said he hadn't been found put as not good, but all I am saying now is, it is easy to forget how good you have to be to be legitimately world level, now, Kiram was not smashed in a 3 round mismatch, he is not a can.

I'll make this very simple, drug cheats should be banned for life!, Tony Bellew, George Groves, Adam Booth, Hearn thinks tyey shiuld be jailed and I agree. Of the 6 of us, in terms of who's opinion is to be taken the most seriously, you and I are at the bottom of the list.

Well, they will watch it and forget how much they were looking forward to seeing the fight before the failed test, but drugs, just like with GGG vs Canelo II, damages the fight. Nah, Saunders isn't entertaining, the fight isn't likely to be a classic, and it will potentially set up a unification fight which could be Canelo vs Andarde, Jacobs/Derevyanchenko vs Andrade, bit of a pity about Saunders vs Andrade, but meh, better we lose the fight and a deug cheat is punished than the alternative.

DAZN is great in my opinion, Hearn has a lot of fighters in the US, Jacobs, Andrade, Miller, Vargas, Farmer, there are a lot of these cards coming up, not just Saunders vs Andrade.

Yes, because there are very few good, world level boxers out there compared to the number of guys that never make it to that level. Regarding Kiram, his performance showed how far Matthysse was from his peak.

We've been over this before, but the fact of the matter is that Hearn is promoting a card with Galahad on it, will promote a card with Saunders on it if he has the chance, and promotes other suspect fighters. It's all about public perception, but when it comes down to the dollar, it is clear what promoters really think, and that goes for more promoters than just Hearn.

I don't think a lot of people will talk about the failed test down the line. For example with Hagler vs. Leonard, most people discuss the competitive nature of the fight and the controversial scoring that followed. Rarely do people talk about the negotiations where Hagler negotiated the ring size, round number, and glove choice away for more money. The fight isn't likely to be a classic because there's a good chance it is a slower paced tactical chess match.

It's not a great stable considering how much money he has to spend and their best fighter, Jacobs, who will be fighting for a title under HBO and Matchroom is lucky HBO is getting out of boxing otherwise he would have continued fighting there. This card was supposed to be his big splash in the US but I'm much more interested in the WBSS card in Japan instead.

That is true, more fighters who aren't world level than there are fighters who are world level. Another stupid discussion.

Promoters like money, I know that, I understand that much about business, a shopkeeper will sell cigarettes, doesn't mean he doesn't hate what smoking does to the lungs, Hearn, Arum, DiBella, any promoter will promote Saunders, Galahad, any drug cheat if it makes financial sense, doesn't mean they don't hate what they do.

I know, and that is a good thing, but nowadays, people have more sources for inside information, and I don't think Saunders vs Andrade will be a classic, also, Saunders might well fail another test. Negotiations, things fans don't like about the A-side/B-side disputes, isn't the same as a fighter failing a drug test.

What with Inoue, Shrio?, so am I, but you seem not to be giving it a chance, let's see how successful it is. I still think Eddie Hearn is the best promoter, who do you think is the best? Arum?

Okay, so if that's true why would you give the benefit of the doubt to someone who has no notable wins or performances?

It's showing that they value the money over their supposed extremely strong moral beliefs though.

He very well may fail another test, but I wouldn't bet on it considering we are so close to the fight. Those were advantages as well, it is just hard to find an exact comparison for it. As it was an out of competition test versus Canelo testing positive and the result of the fight getting changed to a No Contest, I don't think it will be very noteworthy.

Yep, that card. The only two cards they've announced on DAZN are the Vargas vs. Dulorme card I'm not really excited about and the Saunders vs. Andrade card which is good but would be mediocre if Saunders isn't allowed to fight. So there isn't a lot to go off of but they don't have a lot of other guys signed. Either Arum/Top Rank or Haymon/PBC. Haymon used the strategy Eddie is trying to do by using a big war chest to lure guys over, but he had a lot of success and lured a lot of guys away from Golden Boy. The jury still isn't out on Hearn/Matchroom USA but it's tough to see them luring away top guys considering the two big US promoters, Top Rank and PBC, have very large war chests themselves.

I'll tell you exactly why, because when you watch the fight as an observer, you see a talented fighter, and you tab them as a future great, or maybe just a good world level fighter, you might be right, you might be wrong, but that's why I talk up fighters who are unproven. All great fighters were unproven at some stage, Clay was unproven before he beat Liston, Mayweather was unproven before he beat Corrales, Mikey was unproven before he beat Salido. Prograis is unproven, Browne is unproven, Davis was unproven before he beat Pedraza, Seldin looked like a beast a year ago, Rob Brant seemed like he could well be a world level fighter, Munguia was unproven until he beat Ali. Prograis stopped Indongo earlier than Crawford, ok, the same Prograis?, no, and Seldin, Lacy, a lot of fighters have looked extremely dominant, but Clay got dropped by Cooper, Fury got dropped by Pajkic, so Browne getting dropped by the Polish guy doesn't mean he isn't good, that was a learning fight, sometimes the odd knockdown is part of learning in boxing.

Like the shopkeeper seeling cigarettes and vodka, like using too much plastic when it is bad for the sea, people in life, just don't inconvenience themselves, especially given that for example Hearn, if he lost out financially, didn't promote or work with a drug cheat, would that bring the drug cjeat to justice?, so what would be the point?

What were?, the Hagler-Leonard negotiations?, I know, I heard Leonard even said, had it been a 15 rounder, had it been in a smaller ring, he would have lost. I don't think it was out of competition, I think that's what they have said, but for it to be out of competition, the test would have had to have been some time ago.

I thought Jacobs vs Derevyancheno was too, but maybe I got that wrong. Meh, yes in terms if the profile of the fighters and the calibre, but for entertainment value, I don't think so, Andrade would struggle at least to some degree with the late change of opponent, Andrade vs the mandatory would probably be more fan friendly. There are more bloodthirsty fans than there are purists. I like PBC and TopRank, I think they are both classic boxing networks, where there isn't too much build up, hype, and it is just about what happens in the ring, more entertaining fights and less name value fighters who don't deliver, and I like the PBC website, because you can see exactly what the judges' scores were, as well as get their scorecard. I like that Al Haymon is very rarely seen, is not any sort public face, but just does his job well.

It's one thing to look at a guy like Devin Haney who has a lot of talent, is being built up the right way, etc and say he could be a future great, and another to look at someone like Kautondokwa, a complete unknown at 33 who hasn't fought anyone even remotely of note. Pretty much all of the guys you listed had a ton of signs that they would be good and were known fighters before they faced their first world level opponent. Clay won Olympic gold, essentially retired Moore and fought the controversial fight versus Cooper before he fought Clay. Mayweather was certainly proven before he beat Corrales given he had beat guys like Hernandez and Manfredy, but even before he got his first shot versus Hernandez he was proven as a worthy challenger, he was a great amateur, was had success on a contender level and had a known name. Mikey was proven as a challenger, people knew him from his amateur career and he spent a while at the contender level before getting to fight Salido. Prograis has similar reasons to think he will be good, his amateur background, eye test, and good wins at the contender level. The reason I don't think Browne will be good is that he's struggled at a contender level, it wasn't just the knockdown versus the Polish guy, he struggled otherwise. Again, Munguia was the Ring's prospect of the year in 2017 so he was hardly unknown. Davis was a known amateur, looked really good versus the okay level guys he fought before Pedraza. Seldin was facing limited competition and had essentially no amateur background. He made Ulysse look like Pretty Boy Floyd. I don't know about Brant so I can't speak on him. Seldin and Lacy were facing very limited opposition before they got exposed. There were legitimate reasons to think Clay and Fury were good despite struggling, because they were so talented, something Browne hasn't shown. Browne blew his chance at fighting what we now know was a declining Kovalev, so I don't really feel sorry for him. Maybe that version of Kovalev still beats Browne though, Browne was floored in his last fight too, he is hittable. This all isn't to say that someone who struggles on the contender level can't turn it up and win a championship, but that is the exception rather than the rule.

It would "bring them to justice" if they were blackballed by promoters, but I wouldn't want that myself.

The Canelo positive test was out of competition and so is the Saunders one, what defines in competition depends on the commission/testing rules and such but neither of them fell into that window.

Jacobs vs. Derevyanchenko is the final fight HBO is doing apparently. Disagree that Andrade would struggle, this guy is completely unproven, it is a safe bet he is many levels below Saunders. Would it be more entertaining? Yeah probably. I like that as well, that's one thing I don't like about Oscar and Eddie, they talk too much to hype up the fights instead of letting the product speak for itself.

Meh, ok, to be fair being 33 is relevant, and if a fighter has been facing very, very low level opposition like Nick Webb before losing his unbeaten record, you can assume the jump up in levels, skipping levels, will be too much, and the fighter belongs at that lower level. Well signs in terms if what we see in the ring, is subjective to an extent, because at a prospect's career stage, when he is unoroven, some of us think he is good and will be a world champion, others disagree, I'm sure not everyone thought Clay would do nerly as well as he did, I'm sure people questioned his chin and how far he can go when he got dropped against Cooper. Clay was an Olympic gold medalist, fair point, amateur pedigree is something to go on. I thought of writing that, but I think the Corrales win was something else, and he just proved himself on another level. Well that could just as easily prove my point as it could yours, he was fighting at North American level and lower until he was about 30-0, you could have questioned if he was good at world level if he had been fighting at that level for that amount of time, because who did Mikey beat of note at world level before he beat Salido?, he was unproven, wasn't a great amateur. What amateur background? USA titles, fighting Perrella etc, nothing special. Ok, but as I said, a lot of fighters struggle at contender level, Spence didn't have a walk in the park against Lartey, Broner struggled against Quintero, Golovkin had a couple of struggles, some fighters just get the win, rise to the occasion, learn, but it is something to take into account, I don't dispute that. Some fighters don't have an amateur background, most Mexicans don't, but they turn pro young, but some late starters in boxing do well, just not as well as they cpukd have done. Seldin beat Ortiz as well as Matthysse did (2014 Matthysse), and inside the ring, he looked like a dangerous fighter, reminded me of Provodnikov, some thought he was a good fighter otherwise why was he fighting near the top of the Jacobs vs Arias card? But as we saw, he got found out against Ulysse. Yes, but no proof, you know that over here, Frankie Gavin was hyped up, he was a good amateur, better amateur than Mikey or Prograis, David Price looked like a beast against Harrison, better than Haye, beat Fury as amateur, seemed particularly dangerous in the ring, you can't know until fighters step up, and sometimes the fighters without reasons to be expected to win world titles, do just that. Tyson Fury had a tougher time against John McDermott than he did against Klitschko. You don't know how talented a fighter is yet, Fury didn't seem talented in the pro ring until 2014, but I see your point about seeing outstanding attributes, although you can't say an unproven fighter isn't talented with any conviction. It's not about feeling sorry for anyone, I'm not telling you to root for Browne be a fan, I'm not a fan of his, I'm just saying, that he is a good fighter in my opinion, let's hope he gets a world title shot so one of us will be proven right.

PromoterS, yes, just the one promoter?, no, Hearn would have to rely on other promoters which is like relying on every pedestrian walking down the street to give a homeless person money, so Hearn would be losing out financially, for nothing.

I haven't read conformation Saunders's was OOC, just people suggesting it, if it was, it would have had to have been some time ago, if so, why did the media not find out until 3 days ago?

We can't understand the difficulty of a substitute opponent, when you have trained to fight a different fighter, it is definitely worth noting. Although I like Hearn, the Joshua vs Povetkin promo was a joke, the song was 'he's got the whole world in his hands', Joshua is not god!

Okay, well we were talking specifically about this guy who may fill in for Saunders and how good he could potentially do, his age is one of the reasons I thought he would be a non-factor. If he was in his early to mid 20's as an unknown African fighter with his KO %, there is a much better chance he could just be unknown and not have the opportunities to face good opponents yet. I don't think we should spend so much time on specific details instead of general points but I will respond to them. Ali was such an insane outlier it is understandable why people didn't think he would be a great fighter. You are right people questioned him after the Cooper fight, he was a 7 to 1 underdog. No one had ever seen a Heavyweight with his speed and movement and people thought Liston would chin him. Floyd proved himself to be a top pound for pound fighter by beating Corrales, but people already knew he was good before he even beat Hernandez. You have to note that the US amateur circuit is one of the most difficult if not the most difficult, he had beat Danny Garcia, fought guys like Crawford, plus the fact he is related to a former world champion, he was known before he won a world title. You could run a massive list of good current fighters from the US that never made the Olympics/World Championships. Mikey could have fought for a world title a lot earlier but Top Rank wanted him to fight on a conflicting card. Mikey beat contender level opponents, not good but not bad either, and that's the progression you want to see in a prospect instead of just KO'ing bums. You have to take into account even though he was getting a lot of fights in, he was only like 25 when he fought Salido. Spence and Broner were tabbed to be future great fighters, their eye test was good against other opponents and they as they went up in levels they kept doing well. Golovkin is a different case, he had a great amateur career but had a bad promotional situation, the only fight I know of him struggling in early on is the Ouma fight where he was really sick. Mexican fighters that don't have an amateur background take a lot of fights early on in their pro career i.e. what Canelo did. Seldin was a basic puncher who had never faced a pure boxer, didn't have an amateur career, etc. Like Matthysse but to a far greater extent, as soon as he hit someone who could box him he had issues. People like KO's so Seldin was put high up on cards even though he was untested. Of course great amateurs can fail to pan out as professionals, it is just that if someone is a known amateur, they have a much greater chance of success than someone who doesn't, don't think there is a lot of doubt about that. Harrison isn't good, was never good, he is an example of amateur success not necessarily translating into professional success. Price was still at a prospect level, and guess what, when he stepped up to fight a gatekeeper in Thompson he lost. Fury was pretty raw at that point, but you could see he had some talent. The thing is, it is about looking at everything in totality, making an assessment and deciding what will likely happen. With Browne, yeah he has amateur pedigree, but he has struggled vs. the Polish guy, been knocked down in his most recent fight, hasn't had the best eye test otherwise, made weird decisions in the ring such as hitting Williams when he was down, arguably could have got him DQ'd, makes bad decisions out of the ring, for me, that just doesn't add up to what will likely be a world champion. He will probably get a world title shot eventually, he's promoted by Haymon.

Well that's just the collective action problem if they all agree that steroid users are terrible, which I don't believe they actually think.

It is out of competition, in competition is usually only a week or less before the fight. There are different levels of WADA allowance, some stuff is allowed out of competition that isn't allowed in competition. I don't know how that applies to the Saunders case though.

It just comes down to levels at some point though. Regardless of the stylistic matchup, it would be a safe bet this mandatory guy is way worse than Saunders. You'd think Eddie was Povetkin's promoter by the way he was talking, making Povetkin seem like he was an incredible fighter with a 50/50 chance to hype up the fight.

We'll see, if Saunders is out, which I am 60% sure he won't be. Yes and no, good amateurs don't always make good pros like we have both said, and that includes Olympians. So he beat a couple of guys in the amateurs and comes from a boxing family, doesn't change the facts he had a short amateur career, and fought nobody notable before Salido, at that point, he was completely unproven at world level for those reasons, but his resume, now, with the Salido, Lopez, Martinez, Broner, Easter wins, different story. I know you could, that doesn't contribute towards arguing against the point I am trying to make. Contenders at what level?, North American, that's just like beating European level fighters, doesn't prove anything at world level, give up on this one, Garcia proved himself when he beat Salido and since then, but not before then. Browne hasn't been fighting bums, Smith wasn't fighting bums, Skoglund, Fielding are every bit as good as anyone Mikey ever fought before Salido, and so are Lenin Castillo, and the Polish fighter, in my opinion. I know, that's a good point, but he was 30-0, just like Kell Brook, a lot of fights and no world level opponents, why do you think Brook was such an underdog in 2014?, same reason, again, Mikey was unproven before he beat Salido, being young means you have more time to prove yourself, more time for a good future in boxing, but it doesn't prove you are good at world level. Dawson, Eubank Jr, unbeaten, tabbed for greatness, great eye test, all that, and by the way, Broner wasn't dominant before he became world champion, only just got past De Leon and Quintero, and Spence's opposition was not strong before Algieri, my point is, fighters can be tabbed, that is effectively someone making a prediction, and the only definitive test is world level fighting, you talk about eye test, being tabbed when it helps your point for Broner and Spence, but when we look at how dominant Smith was bar Skoglund, and what I told you about how he was the most highly regarded prospect in the UK, sure, tabbed for greatness, eye test, didn't matter at all did it?, this is what I mean about you making discussions one sided. I know he had a bad promotional situation, but that seems like an excuse, and really, his fault or not, the point is, for whatever reason, he was unproven. No, he struggled against Gardner. I know that. We know that now, but we didn't before he fought Ulysse, and some fighters, Mexican or not, do not have good amateur careers. Again, when he fought Ulysse, but before that, we didn't know he was that limited. You make it sound like people knew exactly how he good he was, put it this way, I don't think he was put in there against Ulysse just to get his head boxed off, get dropped, dominated. I know, but here we go again, fighters don't prove themselves until they get a world level pro win. But this is what I'm saying, we know that now, we knew that probably before the Haye fight, but what did you say about the Olympics earlier?, not all amateurs make good pros and Harrison is not one in a million fighters, he is just the best known example, Harrison was an Olympic gold medalist, isn't world level, professional, so for other Olympic gold medallists, it is not a given that they are world level as pros. Guess what?, yeah you can still bash Price as much as you want, but I don't think any more than simple honesty is necessary, no need to emphasise. He was still at the prospect level, looked just as good as fighters who could be better than Joshua, Wilder, before the Thompson loss, he was unbeaten, most dangerous puncher in Europe, beat Fury as an amateur, smashed McDermott in 4, smashed Harrison more impressively than Haye, at that point, there was no reason to doubt he could be a world champion. I couldn't, when did Fury seem talented before 2014?, all we had to go on was what Manny Steward said. Oh I know that, and what is funny about this, we are making exactly the same point at times. Fury got dropped by Cunningham and Pajkic, Browne might have a suspect chin, but the Polish guy fight was a learning fight, he made a statement against Ntetu, not win wise, but eye test wise, Castillo is good. That doesn't mean anything, bad habits, fighting instincts taking over, happens in boxing. I think Browne is top 3 at 175, I think Beterbiev, Bivol, Browne, Alvarez, Jack, Stevenson, that's my opinion, and you can't complain about that, you can easily disagree, but I don't see how you can disagree that strongly or consider it a stupid list.

What promoter doesn't hate PED use?

What so the substance leaves his system in 2 weeks?, I'm not convinced, the timing seems very suspicious. I think they have found a way to disguise it, I think Saunders is a drug cheat, and I think we can take what Victor Conte says, seriously.

Not saying the opponent switch outweighs it, not saying mandatory would give him more trouble than Saunders even on one day notice, assuming he isn't a lot better than you think. Yeah well it's also how carried away people get, I mean, a Christian song for a fight promo, it was like it was selling AJ as god, I thought that was ridiculous, and also, the media over here, have always gotten very carried away with Joshua, given him tough expectations to live up to, Joshua is a much better role model as a normal athlete, not made out to be a saint, obviously being exaggerated by the media, maybe Hearn a bit, just the publicity, but I still like Hearn and Matchroom, you don't have to, but I stand by my opinion, 100%

Danny Garcia is not just "a guy", I don't like him but he's had a good career. Mikey had a decent amateur career fighting at a national level, it wasn't short either, he was an amateur from 2001 to 2005. To say he fought no one before Salido, essentially untrue. He beat the level of guys you'd expect to see someone beat, fighting at a regional level championship level, former world title challengers like Concepcion, former champions like Barros. The North American regional level is higher than the European level, simply because there are way more North American champions and former champions than there are in Europe. A current example would be to look at the level of competition Baranchyk, a fighter based in the US fighting for regional titles, faced compared to that of Yigit, a fighter based in Europe fighting for the European title. Garcia was headlining small cards in 2010, three years before he faced Salido. He was known and people thought he was going to be a good fighter. Browne hasn't fought anyone as good as Barros, has been dropped multiple times and went life and death in a regional title fight. Skoglund and Fielding are not as good as Barros, simple as that. There were good reasons to be concerned about Smith before the Groves fight. Brook was a 2 to 1 underdog versus Porter, as you said a lot of that was because he didn't face good opposition which is his promoter's fault, Eddie Hearn. People knew who Kell was and thought he had some talent despite not being proven, and to be fair, he did beat Senchenko before he fought Porter. Chad Dawson had a good career, he beat Glen Johnson twice, Tarver twice, and he beat Hopkins. There were reasons to suspect Eubank Jr would struggle, he barely had an amateur career and his issues with fundamentals have been his downfall as a professional. Broner's competition level before he got to a championship is not as bad as you say it is, again he fought world title challengers and former world champions. Broner was also a known amateur at a national level, had over 300 amateur fights. Spence fought the level of guys you'd expect a prospect to face and Algeri was still before he fought for a world title, so include him and Bundu as well. He faced regional level champions, world title challengers and former world champions before he faced Kell, plus he had a long and successful amateur career. Right, the only definitive way to know if someone is good or not is to put them in a world level test. However when you see someone with a combination of amateur background, eye test, and they are being moved up the pre-world level competition well like Haney is, that's usually a sign of a good prospect. Smith didn't have a good competition level, he had never faced a former world champion or world title challenger until he fought Groves, and the eye test versus Holzken, a great kickboxer but a kickboxer none the less, was not good. I don't really understand what the issue is with the Gardner fight, he won on points, so what? Golovkin had a fantastic amateur career, if he would have started in the US he would have had a lot better opposition early on, the German promoters he had did nothing for him. My point is Seldin had only faced punchers to that point, we had never seen him versus a pure boxer and we had never seen him really box himself. So to say he was good from the evidence we had, well we didn't know that and he got found out by the first pure boxer he faced. It's not a given good amateurs will become good professionals, but it is more likely they will become good professionals than someone who is not a good amateur. Exactly, Price was at the prospect level, he faced a gatekeeper and he lost. To say he looked like someone who could be better than Joshua and Wilder, there are a lot of guys who light it up at a low level and can never translate it, Price is just an extreme example of that. When did Fury look impressive before 2014? How about when he beat Chisora who went on to give Vitali Klitschko the toughest fight of his championship reign? Fury showed he has an awkward and difficult style
with legitimate skills before he got to the Chisora rematch, the Hammer fight and the Klitschko fight. Browne is not anywhere near that level of skill and has the negatives I've mentioned before. Browne is in that situation where he isn't being advanced as a prospect, like I said put him in versus Joe Smith Jr or Sullivan Barrera, if he wins that give him a title shot. Both of them present different challenges to Browne. To say he is top 3 at 175, you are just guessing based on his performances at below world level. You say Gvozdyk is below Browne? Like I said before, Gvzodyk has beat way better opposition than Browne and has a better eye test despite looking mediocre versus Baker and Amar.

I don't really think they care as long as it doesn't affect their bottom line, they run a business at the end of the day.

Possibly, they could have caught him at the end of his cycle if he was taking it intentionally. Is he a drug cheat? Probably. If they decide he's good to go through with the fight I'm fine with that, I want to see the fight.

I completely understand why you like Matchroom especially living in the UK. Boxing in the UK has become a lot bigger with him and he does generally put on good fights.